Early vote totals behind '08 figures

After a surge last week in early voting totals in Potter and Randall counties, numbers flattened out this week and totals are behind those of the 2008 presidential election.

Through Thursday, the 11th of the 12 days of early voting, 11,610 had voted in-person in Potter County. That’s down 13 percent, or 1,973, from the 13,538 that had voted through 11 days in 2008.

In Randall County, 28,383 had voted through 11 days, down less than 1 percent from the 28,617 who voted four years ago.

“I’m kind of surprised like everybody is,” Potter County election administrator Knoxie Mathes, said. “I don’t have a theory as to why that is. It’s just strange to me that all of a sudden it’s started to decline.

“The way it started out, it was like, ‘Oh my gosh, we’re going to have so many people come out and vote,’ but since then, both counties have dropped a bunch. The best word I can come up with is ‘weird.’ It’s just weird.”

Voting totals slacked off in both counties this week after beginning strongly. Potter County numbers were up by 9.5 percent through the first four days, but since Sunday had fallen off 29 percent in the same period from 2008 — 6,615 compared to this year’s 4,682.

Randall County, likewise, has seen a similar decline. The county’s numbers spiked by 15 percent in the first week, but fell by 23 percent in the second week. Since Sunday, 10,931 had voted in Randall County compared to 14,220 in the same time frame in 2008.

Final early voting tallies in 2008 were 35,934, including 2,934 mail ballots, in Randall, and 17,531, including 1,955 mail ballots, in Potter.

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for
following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and
comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are
automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some
comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules,
click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.

Comment viewing options

Sort Comments

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I hate to think that the few who do decide to get out and vote will be the ones that get to decide who will run our country for the next four years. I hope all registered voters get out and vote. It is time that we as voters let the city, county, and federal government know that that we are serious about our votes and we are a force to be reckoned with.

John the lower than 2008s turn out may be because people are finally understanding that their vote for president is not for the person but the party. That's something they should have learned in grade school. Texas is a conservative state and the house will always place their vote for the GOP. I learnd that in civics class which I think they don't even have today. People need to remember president is not the only thing on the ballot. If you don't vote, you have no place or person to complain. It may just me but this years voting cycle is most important in decades. The direction of the country works it's way down from the top, so things decided in Washington with work it way down to the local level and that will determine how things are going to work. So people get out there and vote because even it you vote may note be direct, it does effect you in the long run. I served this great country for 14 years so the rights granted us by our founding fathers would stand for something. YOUR VOTE DOES COUNT, get out there and do it.

The presidential election in this country is decided by only a handful of battleground states. Because of the electoral college, most states are virtually guaranteed for one candidate or the other based on whether that state is a liberal or conservative state.

For example, if you live in Texas (and I clearly wish I did), no matter who you vote for individually, all of the Texas electoral votes will be cast for Romney. You might support Romney and agree with that, but consider this:

I unfortunately live in what I call Communist Connecticut, and no matter how many of us vote for Romney, all of our electoral votes are guaranteed for Obama as Obama leads Romney by 28 to 30 points in Connecticut polling because this is one of the most liberal states in the nation. The majority of the people in this state believe that you can never have enough government, taxes can never be too high, and that there is no such thing as too much regulation--ever. This means that neither candidate has even bothered to campaign in this state as both candidates have accepted right from the beginning that this state is absolutely guaranteed to vote for Obama. This means that both camps have totally written off my vote (and yours too) because neither of us happen to live in Florida, Ohio, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin or possibly one or two other states.

Now wouldn't it be a better system if the candidates had to earn each and every one of our votes?

Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear. Thomas Jefferson in a letter to Peter Carr, August 10, 1787

If one candidate wins the popular vote and the other the electoral college I think we face more division at a time we need the country moving forward more united. Our current system simply means millions of votes don't count.

That being said, I think the lower early turnout is reflective of the lack of excitement about Obama that brought out voters in 08 even when they knew Texas would vote for McCain and that nut Palin.

Was thinking the same thing Guerro. I think the popular vote should determine the.outcome not a hand full of states. There is no telling how many political (favors) are given to the people of those states.